First Jazz LP?
Bayle
free to enlighten me if my questions are poorly phrased.
Does anyone know what the first LP was and when it was released?
The first Jazz LP and its release date?
Was Jazz popular enough to have been an early convert to the new format?
Were there Jazz equivalents in the 78 era of "Boxed Sets"? I've seen
versions of operas and classical music in multi-sleeve binders of 78s.
If so who would have been popular enough to receive this treatment?
I would especially be interested in knowing about Armstrong and Ellington?
I saw in a post on this newsgroup that though Goodman's Carnegie Hall
concert was recorded, at that time there was no format in which to release
it.
Finally, does anyone know of a good reference source laying out this
information, for both Jazz and other forms of recorded music?
Thanks.
Chris Albertson
recall there having been a delay before the initial jazz release. As for 78
rpm records, there were numerous jazz albums released; they were actual
albums, not boxed sets, and the term carried on into the LP era. Duke, Louis,
Kid Ory, Lennie Tristano, Bessie Smith (reissues) were among the jazz artists
whose releases appeared in album form--jazz was rarely released on 12" 78's.
The Goodman Carnegie Hall recordings contained tracks that were too long to
fit on a 10" 78 rpm side, hence not practical. It really wasn't until Norman
Granz started putting out the JATP concerts that live jazz recordings appeared
on the commercial market.
I am not sure what kind of information you seek a reference source for, but
there are good discographies covering all of recorded jazz (including the
decades Burns and Wynton fail to recognize), and there are guide books. The
latter contain selected releases and reviews.
Top Catt
says...
Well, here's an unusual (but I'd say valid) candidate: the two seven-
minute stereo recordings of the Ellington band that RCA Victor made in
1932. These were available fairly recently on a CD from a small label,
Natasha Records. It's obvious from listening to both sessions that they
were carefully worked out with not only the extended-length recordings
(three minutes longer than a 12" 78), but with stereo in mind. Cootie
Williams and Barney Bigard execute "panning" effects that move from one
speaker to the other--probably by the simple method of swiveling around
from the left mike to the right as they played, given the fact that there
was no electronic way to do this. Fascinating listening--there's also a
blazing, up-tempo stride solo by Duke, who rarely played that way later
on.
T.C.
Chris Albertson
medleys by Armstrong and Ellington. The experiment went no further, as far as I
know. Many years later, Prestige released a handful of 16 rpm albums (I still
have the MJQ release), but that, too, failed to catch on.
I remember reading, many years ago, that the Ellington "stereo" recordings were
actually not meant to be merged (I think Sir Adrian Boult also made such a
recording). I know that Stash had a difficult time synchronizing the two
separate tracks, so one has to wonder how they had planned to do it in the
Thirties--if that was their intention. Cook later introduced his binaural
system, which featured parallel grooves and a two-stem tone arm.
Top Catt
> Victor experimented with 33 rpm recording in the Thirties. They issued extended
> medleys by Armstrong and Ellington. The experiment went no further, as far as I
> know. Many years later, Prestige released a handful of 16 rpm albums (I still
> have the MJQ release), but that, too, failed to catch on.
The experiment went a little bit further, Chris... the Victor 10" 33 1/3
EP was used for quite a few years afterward as--of all things--pipe organ
background music for funeral homes. The main problem with the records was
the grainy shellac. Reduce the grooves of a 78 to half their normal size,
and the result is twice as much surface noise (or more); but it's not
that much of a problem at low volumes (and as my great-uncle the
County Coroner used to say, "I never get any complaints from my
customers").
Some of the other recordings included Stokowski conducting the
Philadelphia Orchestra, and a Vaudeville stage session with Frank Crumit
as MC. I don't know any copies of that last one still exist, but I heard
it (and held the record in my hands) when I was a young sprout.
> I remember reading, many years ago, that the Ellington "stereo" recordings were
> actually not meant to be merged (I think Sir Adrian Boult also made such a
> recording). I know that Stash had a difficult time synchronizing the two
> separate tracks, so one has to wonder how they had planned to do it in the
> Thirties--if that was their intention. Cook later introduced his binaural
> system, which featured parallel grooves and a two-stem tone arm.
I've seen a Cook tonearm and record--the awkward thing did guarantee 100%
channel separation, but it cut the record's playing time in half. As to
whether the 1932 Ellington recordings were intended to be played as a
single two-channel recording, internal evidence suggests that they were:
the nature of the arrangements, which are full of "room-crossing"
effects. At least, the effort was made to get the stereo signal *into*
the grooves, leaving it to posterity to figure out how to extract it
(which posterity has, in the person of those Stash engineers).
T.C.
Mitchell Kaufman
> Victor experimented with 33 rpm recording in the Thirties. They issued
> extended medleys by Armstrong and Ellington. The experiment went no
> further, as far as I know. Many years later, Prestige released a handful
> of 16 rpm albums (I still have the MJQ release), but that, too, failed to
> catch on.
>
> I remember reading, many years ago, that the Ellington "stereo" recordings
> were actually not meant to be merged (I think Sir Adrian Boult also made
> such a recording). I know that Stash had a difficult time synchronizing
> the two separate tracks, so one has to wonder how they had planned to do
> it in the Thirties--if that was their intention. Cook later introduced his
> binaural system, which featured parallel grooves and a two-stem tone arm.
It's also my understanding that the Ellington recordings were not
planned for stereo, per se.
These recordings were among the highlights of the Ellington Centennial
box set on RCA. Despite imaging/placement inconsistencies, these records
are so vividly reproduced on this set as to give one the uncanny feeling
of traveling back in time.
Simply astonishing.
MK
--
"Let's just keep this between you, me, and the horse."-- Gregory Peck
Carlos May
: Victor experimented with 33 rpm recording in the Thirties.
For audio-history completeness, the first attempt at mass
marketing "long play" recordings were made by Edison in the
1920s-- rotating at 80rpm, vertical-cut fine microgrooves
giving 20 minutes playing time per side.
[...]
: I remember reading, many years ago, that the Ellington "stereo" recordings were
: actually not meant to be merged (I think Sir Adrian Boult also made such a
: recording). I know that Stash had a difficult time synchronizing the two
: separate tracks, so one has to wonder how they had planned to do it in the
: Thirties--if that was their intention. Cook later introduced his binaural
: system, which featured parallel grooves and a two-stem tone arm.
I believe that there were some experiments made with 2 track
stereo all the way back to the wax cylinder days. IIRC,
weren't some stereo reel-to-reel tapes marketed for the audiophile
market somewhat before the first stereo Lp discs?
: Top Catt wrote:
[...]
:> Well, here's an unusual (but I'd say valid) candidate: the two seven-
:> minute stereo recordings of the Ellington band that RCA Victor made in
:> 1932. These were available fairly recently on a CD from a small label,
:> Natasha Records. It's obvious from listening to both sessions that they
:> were carefully worked out with not only the extended-length recordings
:> (three minutes longer than a 12" 78), but with stereo in mind. Cootie
:> Williams and Barney Bigard execute "panning" effects that move from one
:> speaker to the other--probably by the simple method of swiveling around
:> from the left mike to the right as they played, given the fact that there
:> was no electronic way to do this.
I'm wondering if this might have been their playing style at the time?
Some of the Ellington films from the 30s show the horn players
moving back and forth in unison.
I don't know if this is the same as some accidental stereo recordings.
For a while RCA Victor used seperate mikes going to seperate master
discs just for technological back-up. From the late Fred Ramsey's
description, the Jelly Roll Morton's New Orleans Jazzmen may have
been made this way-- has anyone tried to find if a stereo version
of this could be made?
Wondering simply, -- Froggy
* Fro...@neosoft.com ** "The Information Super-Frog" [dibs] *
"Moral disaster is coming to hundreds of young girls through the
pathological, sex-exciting music of jazz orchestras." -- The Illinois
Vigilance Association * http://www.angelfire.com/la/carlosmay/
Michael Laprarie
What we consider today to be an "album" is usually a set of tunes that are
sequenced in a pre-arranged order and designed to be heard as a continuous
set. That distinction probably begins in the mid-1940's with 78 rpm records
that were newly recorded by artists and specifically released in
multi-record sets. A good example would be Benny Goodman's "Goodman Sextet
Session" which was 8 sides recorded in 1944 and released as Columbia set
C-113. I am not aware of any of those sides being released as singles.
There are dozens more of music of all varieties.
The multi-record 78 rpm "album" came into being in the early 1940's. They
consisted of three to six (four was average) records in a cardboard folder.
While this format existed earlier for lengthy classical works that had to be
split between several sides of 78 rpm records, it was not until the 1940's
that it was used for pop music and jazz. The first widespread usage of this
format that I am aware of was for the re-issuing of classic swing and jazz
performances, which was brought about by the musician's strike of 1942 -
1944. Since the musicians were not recording any new records, record
companies like Victor and Columbia were forced to dig into the vaults in
order to come up with material to sell. It was a great thing for music
enthusiasts, who finally got the opportunity to hear and own classic jazz
performances from the 1920's and 1930's that were long unavailable. An
example of this would be "Benny Goodman Sextet", Columbia set C-102, which
features selections that group recorded between 1939 and 1941. There are
dozens more.
These multi-record sets were considered to be collections and not really
designed to be listened through continuously. The modern long playing
record was introduced in 1948 by Columbia and was intended for classical
music. The lp's playing time made it possible to put an entire movement or
entire short work, uninterrupted, on one side of the record. The lp was not
created to store a collection of songs, but rather for one long work.
When lp's of pop and jazz were first released in the late '40's and early
'50's, they were put together from previous recordings, and were sold as
collections of favorite recordings by the artists. It was not until the
early 1950's when record companies like Clef, Prestige, and Blue Note began
to specifically record jazz for issue only on long play records. Even then,
the record companies would still release singles on 45 or 78 that were
edited from the lp sessions.
I'm not sure if anyone really knows which record company or artist released
the first specially recorded multi-record 78 rpm set in the 40's, or the
first specially recorded lp of jazz music in the 1950's. To paraphrase, it
all depends on what the meaning of "album" is.
Mike
_____________________________________
Bayle <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:01c0b805$07bdcb40$1c541cd0@ilzyausv...
Jack Woker
> I'm not sure if anyone really knows which record company or artist
released
> the first specially recorded multi-record 78 rpm set in the 40's, or the
> first specially recorded lp of jazz music in the 1950's. To paraphrase,
it
> all depends on what the meaning of "album" is.
I think the first specially recorded jazz "album" was "Chicago Jazz",
recorded in 1939 by Decca , featuring groups led by Eddie Condon, George
Wettling, and Jimmy McPartland.
jack
Joerg Walther
> Well, here's an unusual (but I'd say valid) candidate: the two seven-
> minute stereo recordings of the Ellington band that RCA Victor made in
> 1932. These were available fairly recently on a CD from a small label,
> Natasha Records.
Sounds interesting. Do you know where I can get these CDs? I searched
both Amazon.com and CDNOW but couldn't find them. Exact title?
- jw -
--
And now for something completely different...
________________________________________________________________________
The rmb troll faq is at http://liquid2k.net/rmbtroll. Spread the word!
Chris Albertson
label) went out of business a few years ago. I guess you would have to
scour second-hand shops, or e-Bay.
Joerg Walther
>>> Natasha Records.
> These may be hard to find, because Stash (Natasha was a Stash subsidiary
> label) went out of business a few years ago. I guess you would have to
> scour second-hand shops, or e-Bay.
Thanks, I'll check into that. If anyone else knows another source
though...
John Powell
> I don't know who was the first jazz artist to make it to LP, but I don't
> recall there having been a delay before the initial jazz release.
Miles' _Dig_ was *among* the first.
Chris Albertson...Chris Albertson... that name is familiar...
John